a question on the "lesser" and "greater" [Archive]

gag order

27th April 2005, 01:43 PM

if voting is considered the "the lesser evil" then what is the "greater evil" ?

is the "greater evil"*******committed when someone does not vote*******?

those who argue that it is ok to vote describe it as "the lesser evil" acknowledging that it is an "evil" but determined nontheless to commit it. 

and this is where the problem lies: does the principle of lesser and greater evil apply when we have a third choice ie not to*******vote at all since there is no pressure on us to do so hence we are free from choosing a lesser or greater evil ?

if a tyrannical government threatened my family then yes i would choose the "lesser evil"*******but since i have choice to do neither and i am not under threat i choose not to vote.

if i was given a choice between BLT (greater evil) and cajun chicken (lesser evil) i would choose neither*******since it is not obligatory to choose any of them i*******would rather have the egg mayo! 

even*******if all the muslims witheld from voting, the kafir politicians are still obliged to uphold their free and democratic society*******and to dispense justice to*******ALL whether they be muslim, jew, or sikh. so is it really necassary for us to even commit this "lesser evil" by voting ?*******

muslims have been voting in this country for decades, yet*******EID is still not recognized voting has not benefitted us in the least however my company chose to recognize EID even though the government doesnt and yes i did get the*******day off and i didnt have to vote for it !

the politicians who seek your vote are obliged to uphold the principles of a free and equal society well meaning though it is the inner circle of freemasonry who some times interfere and dictate matters to*******everyone on every level (like the terrorism act) it is they who decide who wins the election not you ! you may as well bin your vote card for the matter has been decided at the bilderberger conference. 

but people are made to feel that they have made a difference and hence the election facade (elections were introduced to prevent people from revolting so instead of revolution you can now vote for the one that best*******represents your interests)

but no matter who you vote for the same people remain in power - the inner circle of freemasonry.

so the people who desire to vote explain to us why*******you would want to vote for the dajjal worshipping inner circle of freemasonry ? if you want to vote that is your choice though i would discourage you from it but please dont use islam to justify an act*******or minhaj not found in the sharia!

Samira

10th December 2005, 11:14 PM

Hmm.. interesting. I do think that in SOME circumstances voting is the best option. I mean cases like if you are in a BNP stronghold for instance and if the muslims do not unite and vote for a certain party, the BNP would win the seat, but otherwise i do think one should abstain, since when you vote for such and such candidate, you are endorsing them and even those that are on 'the muslims's side' like Respect will still have views contrary to shariah, for instance wanting to legalise gay marriage. But if its a choice between voting, or not voting and letting an anti-islamic party win, then to vote would be the better option. theres a good leaflet about this by at-tarbiyyah, you can get it free from their site.